Property Insurance Coverage for Emerging Risk of Underground Climate Change 

July 8th, 2024|Categories: CLE OnDemand, Environmental Torts, Insurance|Tags: , , , , |

In this CLE webinar, Anderson Kill attorneys, Dennis J. Artese, Ethan Middlebrooks, and Thomas Dupont and professional engineer, Kenneth R. Quigley discuss permutations of policy language and state law that may affect coverage for damage caused by underground climate change, including how state law treats anti-concurrent causation clauses, whether “human-caused” exceptions to earth movement exclusions may apply to underground climate change, and whether “abrupt collapse” exceptions to exclusions for building collapse may apply when undetected structural damage triggered by underground climate change triggers collapse.

Biometric Privacy Litigation and Coverage Disputes with John Leonard and Cort Malone

June 30th, 2024|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, ELP, Insurance|Tags: , , , , |

Biometric data is big business. In many cases it even helps make our lives better.  It also presents  significant risks for a variety of parties, in addition to those of us who surrender our data. Companies collecting,  storing, utilizing, and monetizing the data face penalties and litigation bolstered by the increasing number of states enacting biometric information privacy acts, or BIPAs, the first of which was in Illinois. In this episode, we discuss the state of biometric privacy litigation, the regulatory landscape, insurance coverage considerations, and recent rulings with guests John Leonard and Cort Malone of Anderson Kill P.C.

Automation Comes to Our Litigation Nation with James Lee

June 20th, 2024|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, ELP, Technology Law|Tags: , , , , |

In this episode, we discuss litigation automation and another case in which innovators are using artificial intelligence to transform legal operations with guest James M. Lee, co-founder and CEO of LegalMation. Listen and learn more!

The Medical Monitoring Tort Remedy

June 4th, 2024|Categories: CLE OnDemand, Complex Business Litigation, Mass Torts|Tags: , , , , |

The medical monitoring tort remedy – allowing for medical monitoring without physical injury – is recognized in 14 states and not allowed in 23. The law is divided in two states while the rest have not specifically addressed the issue. States that allow medical monitoring to do so when a group of claimants is at increased risk of disease or injury due to exposure to a known hazardous substance or a dangerous product as the result of a defendant’s conduct. Under this tort remedy, claimants are tested periodically, for an agreed or decided period, usually between 10 and 40 years. In this CLE webinar, Gentle Turner & Benson LLC attorneys Edgar (“Ed”) C. Gentle III and Katherine (“Kip”) A. Benson discuss the evolution of the medical monitoring tort, related cases, tests to determine whether the tort should be applied, types of monitoring, and the arguments for an against medical monitoring.

Mental Wellbeing and Fulfillment for Litigators: Sara Lord Interviews Gary Miles

May 22nd, 2024|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, ELP, Employment|Tags: , , , , , |

In this episode, Sara Lord of Legal Metrics speaks with Gary Miles, success coach and former litigator. about the professional dissatisfaction litigators experience when the pursuit of fulfillment clashes with high-stress demands, and practical strategies for managing anxiety and embracing mindfulness. Listen and learn.

Litigation Prognostication with Dan Rabinowitz

May 14th, 2024|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, ELP, Technology Law|Tags: , , , , |

In this episode, Dan Rabinowitz, Co-Founder and CEO of Pre/Dicta, discusses how the power of technology will make predicting litigation as commonplace as predicting the weather. He also shares insights into a study Pre/Dicta conducted that tested assumptions about judges based on their political affiliations. Listen and learn!

Technology-Assisted Review: Sara Lord Interviews Data Scientist Lenora Gray

April 14th, 2024|Categories: ELP, Law Firm Operations, Technology Law|Tags: , , , , |

In this episode, Sara Lord of Legal Metrics speaks with Lenora Gray of Redgrave Data about eDiscovery in the practice of litigation and how it has been transformed by technology-assisted review tools – or TAR, and how these tools work. Every litigator needs to understand how eDiscovery tools work. They should be able to answer questions around the approach being used, why that approach was chosen, the reliability of the assisted review, what human oversight was implemented, and more. Listen and learn. PLUS: Watch the video for outtakes and bonus content!

Litigators, YES Litigators: One Attorney’s Journey Within and Without the Legal Industry

February 19th, 2024|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, ELP, Law Firm Operations|Tags: , , , , |

In this episode, we discuss all the things one former litigator, Somya Kaushik, Senior Corporate Counsel at Mineral and Adjunct Professor of Law at Lewis & Clark Law School has done, and the advantages she feels a litigator can bring to a small company – one that isn’t embroiled in litigation (and would like to keep it that way). As she notes, "a litigator is well-positioned to identify actual but often overlooked legal risks, effectively mitigating issues and reducing both business and legal risks". Listen and learn more!

Cracking the College Sports “Cartel”: Good for Athletes, Competition, and the Games by Joy Sidhwa and Tim LaComb

February 13th, 2024|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, Emerging Litigation & Risk, HB Tort Notes, Journal, Mass Torts, New Featured Post for Home Page, News|Tags: , , , , |

Momentum in the national debate over whether a college athlete should profit from licensing deals for their “names, images, and likenesses,” or NILs, swung in favor of players on June 21, 2021, when the Supreme Court ruled for the athletes in NCAA v. Alston. Authors Joy Sidhwa and Tim LaComb of MoginRubin, LLP discuss the impacts of the decision and subsequent court decisions and state legislation which have further cemented and defined the changing amateurism rules in college sports. As the authors note, "the ultimate test of whether amateurism drives demand will come after new state laws allow compensation unrelated to education. If compensation doesn’t trigger a drop in demand, the NCAA will lose its procompetitive justification for the restriction and likely bring an end to amateurism rules".

Massive Mass Tort Settlements and Liability Forecasting

February 1st, 2024|Categories: Business Litigation, ELP, Mass Torts|Tags: , , , |

In this episode, we discuss Liability Forecasting and the role it plays in the administration of massive, sometimes multi-billion-dollar mass tort settlement trusts with guests Mark Eveland and Ed Silverman of Verus LLC, which provides litigation support services to law firms working on mass torts, such as case management and medical review services, settlement administration, business and advisory services, and analytics. Liability forecasting mechanisms were built to fairly and judiciously compensate current and future claimants for their injuries. Listen and learn more!

Navigating International Discovery

January 31st, 2024|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, Corporate Compliance, ELP|Tags: , , , , |

In this episode, we discuss navigating the complexities of international discovery with Ben Daniels of Robinson+Cole and the benefits of understanding jurisdictional differences and having specialized tools and strategies to cut through the complexities. As Ben notes, "if you litigate in a foreign court, discovery, as it is known in the U.S., is not going to happen. But parties often forget a powerful tool to get around those restrictions". Listen and learn more!

Copyright Issues in Generative AI for Software: Doe v. Github, Inc. et al.

January 17th, 2024|Categories: Emerging Litigation & Risk, HB Tort Notes, Intellectual Property, Journal, Mass Torts, New Featured Post for Home Page, News, Technology Law|Tags: , , , , |

The ongoing case of Doe v. Github Inc. et al. addresses copyright-related issues inherent in the Copilot generative AI that allows users to enter prompts to generate software code. This case addresses many of the issues involved in the training and use of generative AI for generating software code. The author, Jeffrey Gluck examines these issues, which he anticipates will have far-reaching implications for AI-generated works in the future. As Jeffrey notes, "Github is a case that may have far-reaching implications for AI-generated works in the future".

Go to Top